Yeh it probably is expensive - but we currently have no other way (other than gas) to cover the low-wind/sun periods; while there are times when the UK can almost run purely off wind, there are other periods where we get ~5% of that wind energy for a week or so; the battery storage is nowhere near useful for that.
They're right, though. Doing both is dumb. The alternative to renewables + storage is nuclear + storage, with the nuclear + storage having the advantage of the storage capacity needed being more predictable and a bit smaller, but with the massive disadvantage of the nuclear being extremely expensive and slow to build. But building enough nuclear plants to do what you're proposing, and then turning them off most of the time to get energy from the renewable plants you're also building, and only drawing from them unpredictably, is objectively the worst option.
Hydrogen is the worst possible fuel. It's the least dense material in existence so you need a ton of it. It has to be made from either cracking polluting materials, or using a huge amount of electricity. It is really difficult to store and really flammable.
Nuclear is endless clean energy. Why do people like you keep ruining everything? If it wasn't for you, we'd have had full nuclear by 1980. No oil problems, no terrorist states, no dubai.
This would be green hydrogen. Sure, it has low density, but underground storage is pretty cheap at scale. Yes, it's flammable, but that can be handled, and is handled routinely -- the world currently produces and consumes 700 cubic kilometers (at STP) of hydrogen per year.
The huge advantage of hydrogen here is that a gas turbine power plant might cost $600/kW, a tiny fraction of the cost of a nuclear power plant. So if you have a need for a backup plant whose cost will be dominated by amortization of its fixed cost, hydrogen beats nuclear.
Running existing plants is about the cost of gas - building new ones is extraordinarily expensive and is something like 3x or 4x the cost of other options, even after adjusting for nuclear’s much better capacity factor.
Please no more of Stop Sizewell C's Alison Downes a.k.a. (Moira) Alison Reynolds [0] & [1], who also happens to be one of the directors of the Greenpeace Environmental Trust [2].
> That’s why France had to raise the price because even with subsidies they couldn’t cover the costs
I'm not quite sure what you meant by this. By France did you mean EDF? And which power station are you referring to?
> I'm not quite sure what you meant by this. By France did you mean EDF? And which power station are you referring to?
I am not sure either. But they keep increasing the proposed subsidies for the EPR2 program, and they still haven't been able to pass them.
The French government just fell due to being underwater while being completely unable to handle it. A massive handout of tax money to the nuclear industry sounds like the perfect solution!
Very curious how it got in there. I found this snippet while searching for the connection:
“James Tagg, a tech entrepreneur, wanted to found a Penrose Institute in San Diego to pursue the consciousness theories. Penrose went along with the plan and Tagg set about fundraising. At a meeting of consciousness aficionados in 2017, Penrose was told there was someone who wanted to talk to him who might be willing to put big money into the institute. This turned out to be Jeffrey Epstein, who had for some time financed initiatives in physics as well as in mind and brain research. ‘I was sitting there talking to Jeffrey Epstein and he was asking me about this institute,’ Penrose told Barss. ‘Now I didn’t really know anything about him. He said he had these parties. He was wondering whether I’d be interested to go to New York. He could invite Woody Allen.’ Penrose’s colleagues told him that Epstein was a convicted sex offender; Penrose recommended to Epstein that he support a colleague of his, a female physicist, but decided to skip the party.”
Could this be prompt injection or something that snuck an ai book in?
How do people deal with all the different quantisations? Generally if I see an Unsloth I'm happy to try it locally; random other peoples...how do I know what I'm getting?
(If nothing else Tongyi are currently winning AI with cutest logo)
I've seen (commercial) software put in 'Escrow' before when a client uses it; effectively a lawyer (or similar) holds onto a copy so that if the original company goes under, then the buyer can get hold of it.
I guess if you were using the LLM to process data from your customers, e.g. categorise their emails, then this argument would hold that they might be more risky.
Agreed. Some of the big companies seem to be claiming that by going with ReallyBitCompany's AI you can do this safely, but you can't. Their models are harder to trick, but simply cannot be made safe.
This url is on the main Xubuntu website, under "Xubuntu 24.04": click "Release page," then select United States. From there, you download the following files: SHA256SUMS, SHA256SUMS.gpg, xubuntu-24.04.3-desktop-amd64.iso
The output of the other checksum commands is shown here:
[user@host]$ gpg --keyid-format long --verify SHA256SUMS.gpg SHA256SUMS
gpg: Signature made Thu 07 Aug 2025 06:05:22 AM CDT
gpg: using RSA key 843938DF228D22F7B3742BC0D94AA3F0EFE21092
gpg: Can't check signature: No public key
[user@host]$ sha256sum --check SHA256SUMS
xubuntu-24.04.3-desktop-amd64.iso: OK
(output omitted for results of Xubuntu minimal version, which was not downloaded)
The checksum is a cryptographic hash generated from the ISO file's contents. While the checksum for a specific, unchanged ISO file is fixed, the checksum that is published on a website could be deliberately altered by an attacker to hide a modified, malicious ISO.
Generally speaking, a signature is cryptographically signed, when a checksum value is encrypted with the owners private key. The according public key should ideally be distributed in a chain-of-trust, so it can be obtained through a trusted channel.
Since the distro's site was compromised you also have to check that any keys it distributes haven't changed. And that the compromise wasn't done by a legitimate maintainer.
We are in a perpetual loop of inefficient check methods, a bunch of steps, rediscovering what a supply chain attack is, a bunch of steps and just loop back over again.
Please remember to go gently and slowly/appropriately with people; Help people who want to move, show off how you're using stuff - but don't push too hard and make sure the setup is right for the person.
Agreed, but some are nice enough that I'll make sure I get them installed where I can. 'ag' is my go to fast grep, and I get it installed on anything I use a lot.
reply